About Me

In the name of Allah (God),
I have decided to dedicate sincere and honest endeavour in helping to establish the Truth by helping to defend the good name of the last Prophet (pbuh) of Allah as well as refuting many other lies and misconceptions that are being disseminated by the insincere, wicked, deceptive, intellectually and morally bankrupted individuals as well as the ignorant individuals who all share a faulty characteristic; a blatant disregard for the Truth.
I ask Allah to purify my intentions and save me from doing any good action for self-aggrandizement, as all actions are judged by intentions. May Allah Love me, and bless this work. My message to any non-Muslim reading this is thus:
Please give Islam a chance, research it for yourself and allow Muslims and Muslim sources to be your primary resources you refer to when studying Islam rather than basing your views on agenda-motivated Islamophobic sources.
O Allah, You are Al-Wadud (The Loving)...please O Allah love me and bless all those Muslims and non-Muslims who read this.
Ameen

Monday, 3 January 2011

The Bible verse which disproves the resurrection and blood atonement (John 17:4)

What is the answer?

If Jesus really came here to simply die for humanity’s sins as a blood-atonement then why did he say he had FINISHED his mission BEFORE the alleged crucifixion and resurrection? Surely, this means Jesus’ mission was never to act as a blood sacrifice:

Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.I have brought you glory on earth by finishing the work you gave me to do. [NIV- John 17:3-4]

Notice how Jesus confirms God is “ONLY true God” and Jesus confirms his status as a Prophet by describing himself as “whom you [God] has sent”

Also note that Jesus has FINISHED his work. Christians often tell us Jesus was sent to die for the sins of mankind BUT here Jesus is confirming his work has been completed BEFORE the alleged story of crucifixion and resurrection. If this portion of the Bible is not a forgery we can clearly see Jesus has refuted the beliefs of blood atonement and the resurrection.

The entire passage is quoted in the comment section. I would like Christians to think over this matter rather than offering a "refutation" out of pride. These are matters of salvation. Surely pure montheism is key in terms of salvation.

Now the part you didn't post. In verse 6 Jesus goes on to pray for his disciples.

"I have revealed you[a] to those whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word. 7 Now they know that everything you have given me comes from you. 8 For I gave them the words you gave me and they accepted them. They knew with certainty that I came from you, and they believed that you sent me."

So let's take a look at this.First Jesus REVEALS the father to those the FATHER has given to him.

In John 14:9"Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father."

Did Mohamed reveal ALLAH, or the Quran? Did Mohamed ever say if you see me you have seen ALLAH? And can you show me where the companions or Sahaba are GIVEN TO MOHAMED by Allah?

He continues with is prayer"I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours. 10 All I have is yours, and all you have is mine."

So he restates he is not "praying for the world, but for those you have given me", but notice something else. "All I have is yours" that sound nice almost Islamic, but he continues "AND ALL YOU HAVE IS MINE"

So tell me Muslims is all that Allah has Mohameds?

In John chapter 5 Jesus explains

"Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, and he will show him even greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it."

So tell me Muslims, did and does Allah show Mohamed EVERYTHING HE CAN DO? Does Mohamed raise the dead and give life to whom he is pleased to give it like the SON?

"And glory has come to me through them. 11 I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of[b] your name, the name you gave me, so that they may be one as we are one. 12 While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by[c] that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled."

Notice he says "I will remain in the word no longer" and "I am comming to you" why is he comming to him? He said it in the begging of the passage in verse 1 TO BE GLORIFIED "with the GLORY HE HAD WITH THE FATHER FROM THE BEGGING"

He then goes on to ask the Father to protect Them by "THE POWER OF YOUR NAME THE NAME YOU GAVE ME"

Here Jesus is clearly saying he has the name of POWER. What is that NAME THAT HAS POWER? YHWY is HIS NAME HIS NAME FOREVER.

He then re states this, that he kept them safe and protected them "BY THE NAME YOU GAVE ME"

Speaking about the Name what does Jesus say elsewhere?

In John 14:13"And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it."

Tell me Muslims can you ask in the name of Mohamed? Will Mohamed give you anything in his Name to glorify Allah?

"13 “I am coming to you now, but I say these things while I am still in the world, so that they may have the full measure of my joy within them. 14 I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. 15 My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. 16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of it. 17 Sanctify them by[d] the truth; your word is truth. 18 As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. 19 For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified.

He states again that he is comming to the Father, and continues to pray for the protection of the disciples from the "Evil One". He then states "For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified."

What does this mean, Jesus is Sanctifying himself so the disciples will be sanctified?

Jesus here is the high priest. Before the High Priest could enter the Holy of Holy's with the blood of atonement he first had to sanctify himself. Read Hebrews 9*10

I'm going to speed this up. In verse 20-24 Jesus prays now for those that will believe in him through his disciples message of him.

"My prayer is not for them alone...

But he concludes his prayer with

24 “Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.

Again he speaks of the glory, for them to see his glory, the glory he has been give becasue you loved me before the creation of the world.

He then concludes

25 “Righteous Father, though the world does not know you, I know you, and they know that you have sent me. 26 I have made you[e] known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them.”

Jesus EXOGEETS the FATHER, he MAKES HIM KNOWN, and he will continue to do so.

joh17:3 (Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent) , biblical jesus confirm that 'eternal life' is the knowledge (could be belief) that of one (and only) true god and jesus whom god sent. No 'living forever' nor 'living in heaven'.

What is your / christian definition of 'eternal life'? Provide the biblical reference.

'..This might come as a shock to you Muslims but we Christians believe that the Father is the only True God. And that he sent the SON who is the ONLY TRUE GOD..'

According to you (1) the father is the only true god(2) the son is the only true godThen there are 'two' only true gods. If the father = jesus , then jesus cannot be the son. He is already the father. You are going around in circles chasing your own backside. Poof!! There goes the concept of trinity. Crumbling like a deck of cards.

I actually recognise you put some time and thought into your response, hence why I'm responding.

Firstly, what does "glorify" mean in Biblical terms?

As for Muhammad and eternal life. Eternal life is simply salvation. Now, the message Muhammad brought was indeed a message which is fundamental in our attaining eternal life. Allah will only accept al-islam as a person's religion. [see Quran 3:19]

And other religions will never be accepted [see Quran 3:85]

For further information related to how the monotheistic message sent with Muhammad and belief in his messengership is COMPULSORY for the Jews and Christians in order to attain salvation please read Hadith240, vol1, book of faith in sahih Muslim

So what we have established is that the monotheistic message sent with Muhammad is indeed key for eternal life. Remember eternal life refers to salvation. Now, if eternal life is contingent upon eman (faith) in the pure monotheistic message sent with Prophet Muhammad then we can also realise the Islamic teaching of, whoever has a mustard-seed of eman (faith) will achieve eternal life.

Given this simplistic understanding we can apply it upon the statement of Jesus in John 17:3

Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent [John 17:3]

So is Jesus claiming something extraordinary with the statement of eternal life? Essentially, he is stating what other messengers have stated in the oast - that is to say, their respective people MUST believe in the ONE TRUE God and the messenger sent to them. That's all Jesus is saying.

We must stress, Muhammad is a messenger for all mankind, thus his message is not one entirely subject to the immediate audience - Jesus' message was indeed only for his Jewish audience. You can see the wisdom here as the terminologies such as calling god Abba would be taken literally by the pagans as they took to the idea of men god and literal sons of god. In fact, Dr Robert Price points to the pagan belief of one man god - the myth surrounding him was that a god came down and copulated with his mother. From memory I think he was referring to the myths surrounding Alexander the Great. Appolonius of Tyana is another one of these man-god characters knocking about, in fact, he was a contemporary (or near contemporary) of Jesus. Could there have been some sort of embellishment on the part of the followers of Jesus in order to “compete” with this contemporary? Allah knows best.

Even, you will admit Jesus was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel according to your Book (Matt 15:24 and Matt 10:6). Hence, his message was not designed for you and I. The message of pure monotheism sent with Muhammad is indeed for you and I. Muhammad is a mercy sent to mankind [see Quran 21:107]

You also presuppose ALL of John is reliable that’s to say you discount the possibility of there being interpolations within it. That my friend, is a dangerous road to embark upon. What is your reasoning behind taking EVERYTHING John has to say? What about John conflicting with the Synoptics? Surely alarm bells should ring? What about the material which is only found in John – given its later date the problematic issue of embellishments must come to mind.

I would also like to ask you to ponder upon Jesus praying. Who was he praying to? Surely, he was praying to his God? That is Allah. My advice to you is to stop taking every portion of John as reliable and adopt a Criterion.

You dismiss the very real message of pure monotheism in John 17:3 – knowing Him as the ONLY true God. You dismiss it based on the Trinitarian teachings. Where did Jesus teach these teachings. I mean, surely if such a radical message was going to be preached an explanation from the mouth of Jesus would have accompanied him. There is nothing of such a nature; hence why you have Unitarians who use the SAME Bible as you but come to a radically different conclusion. The believe in One God without the baggage of shirk (association) you append to the idea of God.

What are you trying to say? Somebody did not bother to record such a statement from Jesus or Jesus was a poor communicator or Jesus never taught such Trinitarian doctrines and the said doctrines are a later understanding which are a product of the danger Jesus forewarned against – that is to say, don’t give the message to the pagans and keep it confined to the lost sheep of Israel asthey would have a comprehension of pure monotheism.

Food for thought.

Thanks for the mature engagement. I hope you ponder upon the points I have made rather than simply try to refute in a heat of the moment situation.

You said "So what we have established is that the monotheistic message sent with Muhammad is indeed key for eternal life. Remember eternal life refers to salvation."

First you did not establish that at all. Secondly Jesus does not say "This is eternal life that they may know the message you gave me when you sent me as being key to eternal life".

No instead Jesus says "This is eternal life that they may KNOW YOU the only true God and JESUS CHRIST WHOM YOU HAVE SENT"

In John Chapter 10 Jesus says "I AM the gate for the sheep... I AM the good shepherd..."

He does not say "My message is the gate, or My message is the good shepherd.

This is personal. There are atheist who believe that Jesus was a wise sage, and they do there best to follow his teachings of love and compassion, of mercy and non judgment. Are they going to be saved? NO!!! why because they do not know Jesus and since they do not KNOW HIM they do not KNOW THE FATHER.

Then as a response to taking these passage's in there immediate context and placing them in the context of the book of John, you throw in the towel.

You claim that the book of John is not reliable. So instead of dealing with what the text says you just make the false claim that it is not reliable.

Why is it that the New Testament is only reliable when it comes to taking a passage, some times not even a sentence out of it's context. But when placing that passage in its immediate context and the context of book itself as well as the rest of the bible. Suddenly it is not reliable. Sad very Sad.

Now you bring up Salvation, as being Eternal Life. What are you being saved from in Islam?

In Christ you are being saved from GOD's Wrath through the Blood of his Son which justifies you from the conviction of the LAW. That is MERCY.

Then out of desperation you misrepresent what Christians believe and then attack that misrepresentation.

WE DO NOT BELIEVE IN A MAN GOD, WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT GOD CAME DOWN AND HAD SEX WITH MARY.

To quote Bart Ehrman "Sounds like you are grasping at straws.

So please stop repeating that.

I do NOT AGREE that JESUS was only sent to save the lost sheep of Israel. He was sent first to the Lost Sheep of Israel, after his glorification on the cross and his resurrection the disciples are sent out to the entire world. Remember his priestly prayer to those who will believe through them.

"Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me."

So I think that concludes my response to your non response. Please answer the questions I have posed. I doubt you will be able to honestly.

I was not asking for the English dictionary definition. Could you give me the Biblical meaning, I mean to ask what did JESUS really mean by this?

If you cannot then it is just another ambiguous statement which you eisegete due to your preconceived trinitarian understanding. Surely the unitarians don't operate in the same fashion yet they have the SAME Bible. This is rather problematic for you.

In order to do a proper exegesis you need to know what Jesus really intended.

It gets even more problematic as we are talking about the Gosepl of John - the least reliable of the four. In fact the quotes attributed to Jesus are in the style of the narrator thus the quotes were not verbatim copies from another document or accurate oral tradition. That game of telephone our dear Bart Ehrman speaks of seems to come in mind.

As for men-god. You do believe in the concept of man-god hence my pointing to the idea of men-god being common place in the immediate environment your form of Christianity flourished.

Fatman: WE DO NOT BELIEVE IN A MAN GOD, WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT GOD CAME DOWN AND HAD SEX WITH MARY

Please stop with th straw man arguments. I never claimed any of the above. This is one reasopn why I don't like discussing issues with "debaters" as all their bad habits manifest in the discussion in an attmept to "win" the argument.

Its not an argument - its a discussion. Its not a debate. Perhaps you did it subconsciously.

Again, you do believe in the concept of a man-god. Hypostatic union is within your theology concerning the doctrine of "incarnation".

Fatman: Now you bring up Salvation, as being Eternal Life. What are you being saved from in Islam?

In Christ you are being saved from GOD's Wrath through the Blood of his Son which justifies you from the conviction of the LAW. That is MERCY

In essense the idea of salvation is the same but you have appended the notion of blodd atonement. A notion whihc is questioned in this post.

You also fired a load of questions concerning what Jesus said and whtehr Muhammad claimed the same. Simple answer, who cares?

We as Muslims do not try to "promote" Muhammad to anything other than a Prophet of God. Furthermore, the Biblical terminology for the points you raise must be considered.

The questions you must ask yourself are thus:

Is John reliable?

What exactly is Jesus trying to say?

Why is Jesus so ambiguous?

Why did he never just state it in simple terms? Why are you (the trinitarian) left with a load of textual gymnastics to try and prove your claim through the alleged quotes of Jesus?

Why are the unitarians using the SAME Bible as you and coming to a very different conclusion concerning who Jesus really is?

I'm not asking you to answer them, I'm just trying to stimulate thought.

On the man god, and the idea that god came down to have sex with Mary.

"Please stop with th straw man arguments. I never claimed any of the above."

Sir you did to claim that, if you weren't claiming that then why bring up the Alexandrian myth?

Finally I am going to say this one more time. We Christians do not believe in a MAN GOD, we do not believe in a MAN that became GOD. We believe in a GOD, who Became MAN. That is the difference now quit mis representing us.

A couple of things. When I accuse you of playing dumb I'm actually not insulting you.

Notice playing dumb, not you are dumb. For instance the Dr White comment. Even your own Muslim brethren called you on that.

There is no way any rational thinking person could come up with what you came up with. There is no way that was AMBIGUOUS.

Now thank you for correcting yourself on your mis representing Christians beliefs. However like most Muslims you will soon repeat your error again and again and again. It's like someone hits the reset button. Muslim's seem to live in Ground Hog day.

Now as far as Unitarian's are concerned. It doesn't matter since I am not a Unitarian. How they come up with what they come up with I do not know. I can only say they do the same thing you do. Isolate the text and then deny or re interpret the other passages.

For instance how can Ahmadians have the same Quran but yet believe something different then you do. How can Shia believe different then you. The Ismaili's, Druze, Alawis, etc..

You see how it is irrelevant to our conversation.

Now I will ask you again in a different way. Please do not respond with some nonsensical false allegation that the Book of John is the least reliable, or something about a cult I know nothing about. Instead deal with what the text says.

If you read the things that Jesus said about himself does that elevate Jesus to something other then a mere man?

Yahya cited John 17:3-4:" Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. I have brought you glory on earth by finishing the work you gave me to do."

There is only 1 God and 3 persons,and just before John makes reference to the God the Father:John 17:1:"Father, the hour has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you."

Generally when the NT says God it means God the Father.

It is also in John 20:17:"I go to my Father and your Father,to my God and your God."

In Ephesians 5:1-20: you have:"Follow God’s example, therefore, as dearly loved children and walk in the way of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God....20 always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Notice it first talks of God and Jesus as separate but later we know the term God means God the Father.

There's more:

Ephesi 1:1-2:" Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God,To God’s holy people in Ephesus,[a] the faithful in Christ Jesus:Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."

Ephes 5:17:"I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit[f] of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better."

Here is where Jesus is said to be the equal of God:

Ephes 5:19-20:"That power is the same as the mighty strength 20 he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way."

As for "finishing the work you gave me to do" it would refer to the preaching of the Kingdom of God message (scholars are virtually unanimous it is an authentic teaching of Jesus).It is obvious from what comes next:

John 17:6-8:" “I have revealed you[a] to those whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word. 7 Now they know that everything you have given me comes from you. 8 For I gave them the words you gave me and they accepted them. They knew with certainty that I came from you, and they believed that you sent me."

Yahya cited John 17:3-4:" Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. I have brought you glory on earth by finishing the work you gave me to do."

There is only 1 God and 3 persons,and just before John makes reference to the God the Father:John 17:1:"Father, the hour has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you."

Generally when the NT says God it means God the Father.

It is also in John 20:17:"I go to my Father and your Father,to my God and your God."

In Ephesians 5:1-20: you have:"Follow God’s example, therefore, as dearly loved children and walk in the way of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God....20 always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Notice it first talks of God and Jesus as separate but later we know the term God means God the Father.

There's more:

Ephesi 1:1-2:" Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God,To God’s holy people in Ephesus,[a] the faithful in Christ Jesus:Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."

Ephes 5:17:"I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit[f] of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better."

Here is where Jesus is said to be the equal of God:

Ephes 5:19-20:"That power is the same as the mighty strength 20 he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way."

As for "finishing the work you gave me to do" it would refer to the preaching of the Kingdom of God message (scholars are virtually unanimous it is an authentic teaching of Jesus).It is obvious from what comes next:

John 17:6-8:" “I have revealed you[a] to those whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word. 7 Now they know that everything you have given me comes from you. 8 For I gave them the words you gave me and they accepted them. They knew with certainty that I came from you, and they believed that you sent me."

Let's see who's really shallow. The context of John 17:3 doesn't refute the fact that Jesus claimed that the Father is the only true God. If your going to say the Father is the only true God, the son is the only true God and the spirit is the only true God, that's irrational as saying: 10 is the only number greater than 8 and 9 is the only number greater than 8. No: both are greater than 8.

In contrast, Jesus doesn't say the Father is the true God, he says ONLY true God.

In verse 5, it doesn't prove his divinity, because having glory with someone greater than you before the world existed is honor given to people, which isn't unique. Similarly, Proverbs 8:23-25 shows even Solomon had glory before the oceans and world was created. This is figurative language, which even Jesus claimed to have used (John 16:25).

Also, the fact that Jesus was given authority shows he is not self sufficient, which refutes your concept of God of self sufficiency.

Also, Fat man said:"So is Mohamed or any prophet the SON who is sent, and given authority over all the people? Does Mohamed or any other prophet give ETERNAL life to those that ALLAH has given him?"

Yes: the teachings that you follow which the prophets brings allow you to enter into eternal life. Similarly, John 12:50, Jesus informs us his (God's) command leads to eternal life. Commands don't originate by Jesus; he is needy of the commands to give to his people, which shows he lacks the self sufficiency attribute.

Also, the FatMan said:

"finishing the work" he is referring to gathering the disciples, protecting them by the name he was given, exojeeting the father etc..."

There is no-where in the Bible implicit or explicit where this interpretation can be understood.

Your forcing your own interpretation on the passage, and trying to make him say what he didn't say.

If your going to try and say this verse refers to Jesus seeing his work of the cross as already finished, it is inconsistent with Jesus praying to be saved (Mat 26:39-44, Mark 14:35-36, Luke 22:43-44).

But with John's own theology, he cleans it up leaving out the prayer to be saved, and instead making him say:

John 18:11:"Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?"

A noteworthy Bible scholar informs us:

"What John's Jesus does instead is to refer disparagingly to the Gethsemane prayer - twice - as something the disciples, not Jesus, are tempted to say. Synoptic words are invoked by John, but to make the opposite point and all in a manner of mockery." (Louis A. Ruprecht -The Tragic Gospel: How John Corrupted the Heart of Christianity - Jossey-Bass - Page. 70).

"John's Jesus does not pray in private. In fact, the scene concludes with Jesus' repeated mockery of the Gethsemane prayer: " The cup that the Father has given me - shall I not drink it? " ( John 18:11). If the Synoptic story of Gethsemane is a story about praying in the face of temptation prior to betrayal, then John's is no longer the same story at all. As I pointed out earlier, of the three elements that seem indispensable to the tragic story of Gethsemane, John retains only the betrayal - and even that is handled differently. The very phrases that lent such pathos and humanity to the Synoptic Passion narrative - " Father, . . . take this cup away from me " - are uttered now by a Jesus whose voice is dripping with irony. These are presumably sentiments for lesser mortals, not the Logos of God. And this is how the essence of the tragedy lying at the heart of the Gethsemane story has been undone. Though John borrows freely from the other gospels, he changes what he takes to suit his own purposes, and he does so always with an eye to replacing them. He thus ends up telling a very different story in a very different way." (Ibid. - Pg. 74-75).

Let's see who's really shallow. The context of John 17:3 doesn't refute the fact that Jesus claimed that the Father is the only true God. If your going to say the Father is the only true God, the son is the only true God and the spirit is the only true God, that's irrational as saying: 10 is the only number greater than 8 and 9 is the only number greater than 8. No: both are greater than 8.

In contrast, Jesus doesn't say the Father is the true God, he says ONLY true God.

In verse 5, it doesn't prove his divinity, because having glory with someone greater than you before the world existed is honor given to people, which isn't unique. Similarly, Proverbs 8:23-25 shows even Solomon had glory before the oceans and world was created. This is figurative language, which even Jesus claimed to have used (John 16:25).

Also, the fact that Jesus was given authority shows he is not self sufficient, which refutes your concept of God of self sufficiency.

Also, Fat man said:"So is Mohamed or any prophet the SON who is sent, and given authority over all the people? Does Mohamed or any other prophet give ETERNAL life to those that ALLAH has given him?"

Yes: the teachings that you follow which the prophets brings allow you to enter into eternal life. Similarly, John 12:50, Jesus informs us his (God's) command leads to eternal life. Commands don't originate by Jesus; he is needy of the commands to give to his people, which shows he lacks the self sufficiency attribute.

"finishing the work" he is referring to gathering the disciples, protecting them by the name he was given, exojeeting the father etc..."

There is no-where in the Bible implicit or explicit where this interpretation can be understood.

Your forcing your own interpretation on the passage, and trying to make him say what he didn't say.

If your going to try and say this verse refers to Jesus seeing his work of the cross as already finished, it is inconsistent with Jesus praying to be saved (Mat 26:39-44, Mark 14:35-36, Luke 22:43-44).

But with John's own theology, he cleans it up leaving out the prayer to be saved, and instead making him say:

John 18:11:"Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?"

A noteworthy Bible scholar informs us:

"What John's Jesus does instead is to refer disparagingly to the Gethsemane prayer - twice - as something the disciples, not Jesus, are tempted to say. Synoptic words are invoked by John, but to make the opposite point and all in a manner of mockery." (Louis A. Ruprecht -The Tragic Gospel: How John Corrupted the Heart of Christianity - Jossey-Bass - Page. 70).

"John's Jesus does not pray in private. In fact, the scene concludes with Jesus' repeated mockery of the Gethsemane prayer: " The cup that the Father has given me - shall I not drink it? " ( John 18:11). If the Synoptic story of Gethsemane is a story about praying in the face of temptation prior to betrayal, then John's is no longer the same story at all. As I pointed out earlier, of the three elements that seem indispensable to the tragic story of Gethsemane, John retains only the betrayal - and even that is handled differently. The very phrases that lent such pathos and humanity to the Synoptic Passion narrative - " Father, . . . take this cup away from me " - are uttered now by a Jesus whose voice is dripping with irony. These are presumably sentiments for lesser mortals, not the Logos of God. And this is how the essence of the tragedy lying at the heart of the Gethsemane story has been undone. Though John borrows freely from the other gospels, he changes what he takes to suit his own purposes, and he does so always with an eye to replacing them. He thus ends up telling a very different story in a very different way." (Ibid. - Pg. 74-75).

"finishing the work" he is referring to gathering the disciples, protecting them by the name he was given, exojeeting the father etc"

There is no-where in the Bible implicit or explicit where this interpretation can be understood. Your forcing your own interpretation on the passage, and trying to make him say what he didn't say.

If your going to say this verse refers to Jesus seeing his work of the cross as already finished, its inconsistent with Jesus praying to be saved (Mat 26:39-44, Mark 14:35-36, Luke 22:43-44).

With John's own theology, he cleans it up leaving out the prayer to be saved & instead making him say:

John 18:11:"Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?"

A noteworthy Bible scholar informs us:

"What John's Jesus does instead is to refer disparagingly to the Gethsemane prayer - twice - as something the disciples, not Jesus, are tempted to say. Synoptic words are invoked by John, but to make the opposite point and all in a manner of mockery." (Louis A. Ruprecht -The Tragic Gospel: How John Corrupted the Heart of Christianity - Jossey-Bass - Page. 70).

"John's Jesus does not pray in private. In fact, the scene concludes with Jesus' repeated mockery of the Gethsemane prayer: " The cup that the Father has given me - shall I not drink it? " ( John 18:11). If the Synoptic story of Gethsemane is a story about praying in the face of temptation prior to betrayal, then John's is no longer the same story at all. As I pointed out earlier, of the three elements that seem indispensable to the tragic story of Gethsemane, John retains only the betrayal - and even that is handled differently. The very phrases that lent such pathos and humanity to the Synoptic Passion narrative - " Father, . . . take this cup away from me " - are uttered now by a Jesus whose voice is dripping with irony. These are presumably sentiments for lesser mortals, not the Logos of God. And this is how the essence of the tragedy lying at the heart of the Gethsemane story has been undone. Though John borrows freely from the other gospels, he changes what he takes to suit his own purposes, and he does so always with an eye to replacing them. He thus ends up telling a very different story in a very different way." (Ibid. - Pg. 74-75)

"Let's see who's really shallow. The context of John 17:3 doesn't refute the fact that Jesus claimed that the Father is the only true God."

Nothing to refute sir "The Father is the Only True GOD" he is YHWY.

"If your going to say the Father is the only true God, the son is the only true God and the spirit is the only true God, that's irrational as saying: 10 is the only number greater than 8 and 9 is the only number greater than 8. No: both are greater than 8."

No sir, the question is who is the ONLY TRUE GOD. The only True God is YHWY, that is his name, that is the name of power, that is his eternal name his name forever. The same Name that the Father gives Jesus. John 17:11-12 "protect them by the power of[b] your name..."them safe by[c] that name you gave me."

So yes the Father is the Only god becasue he is YHWY, the SON IS the ONLY true god becasue he is YWHY, and the SPIRIT is the only true god becasue he is YHWY. They are not seperate entities, they are not sepearte beings. They are all the same being sharing the unique one and only Name. THE NAME, THE ONLY NAME, THE ETERNAL NAME OF POWER.

"In contrast, Jesus doesn't say the Father is the true God, he says ONLY true God."Well duhh yes the Father is the "the only true God" as stated above.

"In verse 5, it doesn't prove his divinity, because having glory with someone greater than you before the world existed is honor given to people, which isn't unique. Similarly, Proverbs 8:23-25 shows even Solomon had glory before the oceans and world was created."

First lets take a look at this text. Proverbs 8 begins with "Does not wisdom call out? " it continues on and then in verse 12 it says very specifcaly who this psalm is about "I, wisdom, dwell together with prudence" it contunes on about "WISDOM" and then we get to the passages that you Isolated from the rest of the text." I was formed long ages ago, at the very beginning, when the world came to be."

So where is WISDOM sharing in the GLORY OF GOD. Show me sir? Either way it is about WISDOM not about Solomon.

"Also, the fact that Jesus was given authority shows he is not self sufficient, which refutes your concept of God of self sufficiency."

I believe I stated in my exojeet that we Christians beleive that the FATHER GIVES EVERYTHING TO THE SON, and THE SON CAN DO EVERTHING THAT THE FATHER CAN DO" So yes just as the Father gives everything to the Son he also gives the authority to the SON.

Now you make the same attempt that Yahya Snow and other Muslims have made regarding Mohamed or any prophet saying the same things that jesus said.

"Yes: the teachings that you follow which the prophets brings allow you to enter into eternal life. ?"

Sir Jesus is clear, he does not say "My message, or my teachings" he says "I AM" over and over and over again. This is personal, he is the center he is the foccus. HE GIVES ETERNAL LIFE TO WHOM HE IS PLESED TO DO SO" not his message not his teachings.

"I am the good sheperd... I am the gate... I am the way...I am the truth... I am the life... I am the reserection... I am the bread of life..."

The next step for you is to do what Yahya Snow and other Muslims do when faced with this. Just throw in the towel and say "The Text is Corrupt" because you can not deal with what the text says.

I possed the question that there are atheists, there are pagans etc.. that revere Jesus and do the best they can do to follow his teachings about loving man kind etc... Are they going to heaven under even Islamic standards? The answer is clearly NO.

Part 3"Also, the FatMan said:"finishing the work" he is referring to gathering the disciples, protecting them by the name he was given, exojeeting the father etc..."

"There is no-where in the Bible implicit or explicit where this interpretation can be understood."

Did you read my response. Jesus is praying to the Father he says "I have brought you glory on earth by finishing the work you gave me to do". So he brought Glory to the father on EARTH. How did he do that? Let's read on.

"I have revealed you[a] to those whom you gave me out of the world. " So that is the work on earth he has completed. He has "revelaed" (exogetted... made known) the Father.

But now since that work is completed Jesus is going to be Glorified with the Glory he had with the Father from the begging. Is he glorifed then? No that is still something that has to take place.

That glorfication comes with the Cross, his Death and his reserection. It is only after his Death on the Cross that he is made known. In the words of the Centurian "This is trully The Son of GOD"

It is actually you and Yahya that force your interpretation on the text.

Let me put it to you this way. Your allah says in the quran "Today I have perfected your religion" so since it was perfected at that verse. That means there are no other revelations after that right?

If he had other reveleations after that then obvioulsy allah did not perfect your religion at that time.

"If your going to say this verse refers to Jesus seeing his work of the cross as already finished, its inconsistent with Jesus praying to be saved (Mat 26:39-44, Mark 14:35-36, Luke 22:43-44)."

I made no such claim. As you can see above the work that is finished is gather the disciples, his glorification on the cross is still something to come, it is something he is praying for.